Its usually hopeless to talk economics to most (but not all) Democrats. Its a demographic fact that most hard-core Democrats are removed from the hurly-burly of the private economy, and thus can entertain fanciful notions about poverty, wealth creation and "fairness".

Its not surprise then that Maryland Democrats have voted to override the governor's veto of the "Walmart Tax", a special 8% payroll tax that specifically and uniquely targets Walmart (the only company that fits the criteria of the bill).

This is a power grab by the unions, who of course are threatened by the economic example of Walmart. Union apologists allege that Walmart underpays its retail workers by 5 billion dollars and that Walmart is a drag on medicare costs, yet as is typical for such disingenuous arguments, they ignore the central principle of economics that demands that costs must be discussed in the context of benefits and vice-versa. Walmart is actually about average for large firms in the percentage of its workforce that get medicare benefits, but what is really remarkable is how much keeping costs down, including worker wages, really improves the lot of (not just) the poor in this country.

Walmart consumers save 50 billion dollars just on food. To give you an idea of the scale of that savings consider that the food stamp program was worth about 30 billion in 2004.

In comparison with other major retail chains like Target and Costco, the typical Walmart shopper earns $35,000 a year compared with 50K for Target and 75K for Costco. As I written before, you can see this anecdotally by just looking at the parking lots of your respective Walmarts and Costcos.

Ironically, the alleged terrible working conditons and low pay still attract job-seekers in record numbers. The unions and their Democrat allies, unable to affect peoples free economic choices, are seeking instead to legislate them for the benefit of a few.

Notably, its not Walmart that is going to suffer--the extra taxes will be passed on to Maryland consumers, particularly those who make $35,000.00 and less. What everyone who actually knows something about business understands that apparently very few Democrats do, is that corporations DON'T PAY TAXES, CONSUMERS PAY TAXES. God help the poor in the blue states.

The Political Teen

Soccer Dad

Ace of Trump doesn't think the law will pass constitutional muster.

The Not So Free State

A Newer World represents the typical Democrat view I think--Walmart must pay "its fair share" of taxes. He also notes with worry that Walmart may not build a distribution center on the eastern shore, a plan that would have created 1000 jobs. Gee, would you? Unions and their Democrat legislator lapdogs don't give a damn--they have jobs.

Old and Evil

Bending the Rail

Patridiots: No politics here folks, move along.

Crazy Politicos Ranting muses about what actions Walmart could take, and they are numerous.

They could start laying off to get under 10,000. By closing stores that are on the low end of the profitability chain, and moving their distribution centers out of Maryland to another state, they could get under the magic number. If that happens are the 7,000 workers who are affected better off than they were?

Honest Partisan lives up to his billing.

So you can put all the mandates on Walmart that you want, but it still strikes me as an inadequate response to a real problem. Maybe the strategy is to make big employers cry uncle and push for national health insurance (the auto industry seems to be moving in that political direction). But it's a bit of a bank shot. I guess what worries me the most about it is the extent it shows Democrats giving up on national health insurance and accepting employer-based health insurance as a lame substitute.

If you want to work at home, you will have to find about the adequate work insurance. Regarding your older home mortgage or any other mortgage deals, you will have to be thrifty. That means keep a check on the credit card.